146 research outputs found

    Pre- and Post-Activity Stretching Practices of Collegiate Soccer Coaches in the United States

    Get PDF
    International Journal of Exercise Science 13(6): 260-272, 2020. Current pre- and post-activity stretching guidelines are designed to optimize performance and reduce injury risk. However, it is unclear whether soccer coaches adhere to these recommendations. The purpose of this study was to determine if collegiate soccer coaches’ perceptions and practices align with current scientific recommendations. A total of 781 questionnaires were electronically distributed to soccer coaches from NCAA Division I and III universities.The questionnaire obtained demographic, professional, and educational information, as well as stretching practices. Statistical analysis consisted of computing frequency counts and means where applicable. Pearson\u27s Chi-square tests were performed to assess the potential differences in stretching perceptions and practices among the cohort of soccer coaches. Results suggest that soccer coaches are choosing some forms of stretching more frequently than other coaches (χ2= 342.7, p\u3c 0.001). Further analysis failed to determine significant associations between stretching type and coaching certification, level, sex, years of experience, and age. Of the 209 respondents, 84.9% believed pre-activity stretching to be of greater than average importance on a seven-point Likert scale. Dynamic stretching (68.7%) or a combination of static and ballistic stretching (18.0%) prior to athletic events was the most typical stretching prescribed. Current post-activity practices demonstrate that most coaches (95.4%) are using some form of a general cool-down following practice or competition. This study is an important assessment of the extent to which collegiate coaches administer appropriate stretching techniques. Most coaches adhere to current recommendations; however, they should continue to evaluate their practices against ongoing research and the practices of their peers

    Identification guide to the heterobranch sea slugs (Mollusca: Gastropoda) from Bocas del Toro, Panama

    Get PDF
    The Bocas del Toro Archipelago is located off the Caribbean coast of Panama. Until now, only 19 species of heterobranch sea slugs have been formally reported from this area; this number constitutes a fraction of total diversity in the Caribbean region. The Bocas del Toro Archipelago is located off the Caribbean coast of Panama. Until now, only 19 species of heterobranch sea slugs have been formally reported from this area; this number constitutes a fraction of total diversity in the Caribbean region. This increase in known diversity strongly suggests that the distribution of species within the Caribbean is still poorly known and species ranges may need to be modified as more surveys are conducted.https://doi.org/10.1186/s41200-016-0048-

    Atlas of prostate cancer heritability in European and African-American men pinpoints tissue-specific regulation.

    Get PDF
    Although genome-wide association studies have identified over 100 risk loci that explain ∌33% of familial risk for prostate cancer (PrCa), their functional effects on risk remain largely unknown. Here we use genotype data from 59,089 men of European and African American ancestries combined with cell-type-specific epigenetic data to build a genomic atlas of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) heritability in PrCa. We find significant differences in heritability between variants in prostate-relevant epigenetic marks defined in normal versus tumour tissue as well as between tissue and cell lines. The majority of SNP heritability lies in regions marked by H3k27 acetylation in prostate adenoc7arcinoma cell line (LNCaP) or by DNaseI hypersensitive sites in cancer cell lines. We find a high degree of similarity between European and African American ancestries suggesting a similar genetic architecture from common variation underlying PrCa risk. Our findings showcase the power of integrating functional annotation with genetic data to understand the genetic basis of PrCa.This work was supported by NIH fellowship F32 GM106584 (AG), NIH grants R01 MH101244(A.G.), R01 CA188392 (B.P.), U01 CA194393(B.P.), R01 GM107427 (M.L.F.), R01 CA193910 (M.L.F./M.P.) and Prostate Cancer Foundation Challenge Award (M.L.F./M.P.). This study makes use of data generated by the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. A full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium data is available on www.wtccc.org.uk. Funding for the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium project was provided by the Wellcome Trust under award 076113. This study makes use of data generated by the UK10K Consortium. A full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the data is available online (http://www.UK10K.org). The PRACTICAL consortium was supported by the following grants: European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175), Cancer Research UK Grants C5047/A7357, C1287/A10118, C5047/A3354, C5047/A10692, C16913/A6135 and The National Institute of Health (NIH) Cancer Post-Cancer GWAS initiative Grant: no. 1 U19 CA 148537-01 (the GAME-ON initiative); Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007 and C5047/A10692), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112—the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defense (W81XWH-10-1-0341), A Linneus Centre (Contract ID 70867902), Swedish Research Council (grant no K2010-70X-20430-04-3), the Swedish Cancer Foundation (grant no 09-0677), grants RO1CA056678, RO1CA082664 and RO1CA092579 from the US National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health; US National Cancer Institute (R01CA72818); support from The National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (126402, 209057, 251533, 396414, 450104, 504700, 504702, 504715, 623204, 940394 and 614296); NIH grants CA63464, CA54281 and CA098758; US National Cancer Institute (R01CA128813, PI: J.Y. Park); Bulgarian National Science Fund, Ministry of Education and Science (contract DOO-119/2009; DUNK01/2–2009; DFNI-B01/28/2012); Cancer Research UK grants [C8197/A10123] and [C8197/A10865]; grant code G0500966/75466; NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (projects 96/20/06 and 96/20/99); Cancer Research UK grant number C522/A8649, Medical Research Council of England grant number G0500966, ID 75466 and The NCRI, UK; The US Dept of Defense award W81XWH-04-1-0280; Australia Project Grant [390130, 1009458] and Enabling Grant [614296 to APCB]; the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (Project Grant [PG7] and Research infrastructure grant [to APCB]); NIH grant R01 CA092447; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center (P30 CA68485); Cancer Research UK [C490/A10124] and supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University of Cambridge; Competitive Research Funding of the Tampere University Hospital (9N069 and X51003); Award Number P30CA042014 from the National Cancer Institute.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/0.1038/ncomms1097

    The Drosophila melanogaster host model

    Get PDF
    The deleterious and sometimes fatal outcomes of bacterial infectious diseases are the net result of the interactions between the pathogen and the host, and the genetically tractable fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, has emerged as a valuable tool for modeling the pathogen–host interactions of a wide variety of bacteria. These studies have revealed that there is a remarkable conservation of bacterial pathogenesis and host defence mechanisms between higher host organisms and Drosophila. This review presents an in-depth discussion of the Drosophila immune response, the Drosophila killing model, and the use of the model to examine bacterial–host interactions. The recent introduction of the Drosophila model into the oral microbiology field is discussed, specifically the use of the model to examine Porphyromonas gingivalis–host interactions, and finally the potential uses of this powerful model system to further elucidate oral bacterial-host interactions are addressed

    Pathogenic Huntingtin Repeat Expansions in Patients with Frontotemporal Dementia and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.

    Get PDF
    We examined the role of repeat expansions in the pathogenesis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by analyzing whole-genome sequence data from 2,442 FTD/ALS patients, 2,599 Lewy body dementia (LBD) patients, and 3,158 neurologically healthy subjects. Pathogenic expansions (range, 40-64 CAG repeats) in the huntingtin (HTT) gene were found in three (0.12%) patients diagnosed with pure FTD/ALS syndromes but were not present in the LBD or healthy cohorts. We replicated our findings in an independent collection of 3,674 FTD/ALS patients. Postmortem evaluations of two patients revealed the classical TDP-43 pathology of FTD/ALS, as well as huntingtin-positive, ubiquitin-positive aggregates in the frontal cortex. The neostriatal atrophy that pathologically defines Huntington's disease was absent in both cases. Our findings reveal an etiological relationship between HTT repeat expansions and FTD/ALS syndromes and indicate that genetic screening of FTD/ALS patients for HTT repeat expansions should be considered

    Trans-ancestry genome-wide association meta-analysis of prostate cancer identifies new susceptibility loci and informs genetic risk prediction.

    Get PDF
    Prostate cancer is a highly heritable disease with large disparities in incidence rates across ancestry populations. We conducted a multiancestry meta-analysis of prostate cancer genome-wide association studies (107,247 cases and 127,006 controls) and identified 86 new genetic risk variants independently associated with prostate cancer risk, bringing the total to 269 known risk variants. The top genetic risk score (GRS) decile was associated with odds ratios that ranged from 5.06 (95% confidence interval (CI), 4.84-5.29) for men of European ancestry to 3.74 (95% CI, 3.36-4.17) for men of African ancestry. Men of African ancestry were estimated to have a mean GRS that was 2.18-times higher (95% CI, 2.14-2.22), and men of East Asian ancestry 0.73-times lower (95% CI, 0.71-0.76), than men of European ancestry. These findings support the role of germline variation contributing to population differences in prostate cancer risk, with the GRS offering an approach for personalized risk prediction

    Genome-wide association analysis of more than 120,000 individuals identifies 15 new susceptibility loci for breast cancer.

    Get PDF
    Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and large-scale replication studies have identified common variants in 79 loci associated with breast cancer, explaining ∌14% of the familial risk of the disease. To identify new susceptibility loci, we performed a meta-analysis of 11 GWAS, comprising 15,748 breast cancer cases and 18,084 controls together with 46,785 cases and 42,892 controls from 41 studies genotyped on a 211,155-marker custom array (iCOGS). Analyses were restricted to women of European ancestry. We generated genotypes for more than 11 million SNPs by imputation using the 1000 Genomes Project reference panel, and we identified 15 new loci associated with breast cancer at P < 5 × 10(-8). Combining association analysis with ChIP-seq chromatin binding data in mammary cell lines and ChIA-PET chromatin interaction data from ENCODE, we identified likely target genes in two regions: SETBP1 at 18q12.3 and RNF115 and PDZK1 at 1q21.1. One association appears to be driven by an amino acid substitution encoded in EXO1.BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A12014) and by the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS). Meetings of the BCAC have been funded by the European Union COST programme (BM0606). Genotyping on the iCOGS array was funded by the European Union (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10710, C8197/A16565), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer program and the Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export Trade of Quebec, grant PSR-SIIRI-701. Combination of the GWAS data was supported in part by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Cancer Post-Cancer GWAS initiative, grant 1 U19 CA148065-01 (DRIVE, part of the GAME-ON initiative). For a full description of funding and acknowledgments, see the Supplementary Note.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from NPG via http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.324
    • 

    corecore